HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7065 of 2016 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE SYED QAMAR HASAN RIZVI, J. 1. Heard Shri Amit Singh, learned counsel for applicant, Shri Arun Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State, Shri Nilesh Anand, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and perused the material available on record. 2. By means of this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioners have prayed following reliefs:- "to quash the entire proceedings of complaint case no. 0001877 of 2015 (Rajendra Jaiswal Vs. Onkar Nath and another) under Section 386 IPC, Police Station Hussainganj, District Lucknow pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Lucknow as well as non-bailable warrant dated 12.5.2016 passed by the court concerned." 3. At the very outset, learned counsel for petitioners has submitted that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the parties have entered into a compromise (by means of compromise deed dated 07.12.2023), which has been verified by the court below on 23.07.2024 in compliance of order passed by this Court on 23.05.2024. 4. Communication dated 23.07.2024 from the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I Room No. 25, Lucknow addressed to the Deputy Registrar (Criminal) of this Court, which reads as under: "ससम्मान अवगत कराना है िक माननीय उच्च न्यायालय के आदेश िदनांिकत 23.05.2024 के अनुक्रम में उभयपक्ष द्वारा प्रस्तुत सुलहनामा, पक्षकारों की व्यिक्तगत उपिस्थित सुिनिश्चत करते हुए, पक्षकारों की पहचान सुिनिश्चत कर, पक्षकारों की उपिस्थित में पूवर् पीठासीन अिधकारी द्वारा सत्यािपत िकया गया तथा माननीय उच्च न्यायालय के आदेश के अनुक्रम में इस आशय की िरपोटर् तैयार की गयी। अधोहस्ताक्षरी द्वारा न्यायालय अपर मुख्य न्याियक मिजस्ट्रेट प्रथम, कक्ष संख्या-25, लखनऊ का कायर्भार माननीय उच्च न्यायालय के नोिटिफके शन नंवर-1682/Admin (Services) / 2024, िदनांिकत : 21.06.2024 के अनुकम में िदनांक 26.06.2024 को ग्रहण िकया गया। पूवर् पीठासीन अिधकारी द्वारा माननीय उच्च न्यायालय के आदेश िदनांिकत 23.05.2024 के अनुक्रम में पक्षकारों द्वारा दािखल सुलहनामे को तस्दीक करने के उपरांत तैयार की गयी िरपोटर् िदनांिकत 06.06.2024 की सत्यािपत प्रित पत्र के साथ संलग्न कर माननीय महोदय को सादर अवलोकनाथर् प्रेिषत की जा रही है। अतः माननीय महोदय से िनवेदन है िक सत्यापन आदेश की प्रित माननीय न्यायालय के समक्ष आवश्यक कायर्वाही हेतु प्रस्तुत करने की कृ पा करें।" 5. Learned counsel for opposite party no. Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prashant Kumar Singh, Amit Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Govt. Advocate, Nilish Anand Onkar Nath Nigam .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And Anr. .....Opposite Party(s) submission made by learned counsel for petitioner or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid are quashed. 6. Learned counsel for petitioner in support of his contention has placed reliance on the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand reported in (2014) 9 SCC 653 and Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641 and has submitted that the petitioner and opposite party no. 2 have settled their dispute through compromise and as such the opposite party no. 2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the petitioner. Opposite party no. 2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the petitioner and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to process further. 7. From perusal of the record, it is apparent that the parties have entered into compromise and have settled their dispute amicably and it is highly doubtful if the ingredients of the offence as alleged are made out. 8. Be that as it may, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties regarding the compromise entered into between the parties; the compromise between the parties be accepted and further taking into account the legal position as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab (supra), Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand (supra) and Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat (supra) the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed. 9. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the present 482 Cr.P.C. petition stands allowed. September 3, 2025 Virendra A482 No. 7065 of 2016 2 (Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench